tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,400
- Reactions
- 6,317
Id re phrase that.
Why do the smartest people need to keep re wrapping the same message?
Tools being used by your trading competition
- Thread starter howardbandy
- Start date
Id re phrase that.
Why do the smartest people need to keep re wrapping the same message?
With 75-80% accuracy and 1:1 and short term trades (high number of opportunities + compound every few days) I don't see how you can't easily destroy Shaw's and Simons's funds performance.
They have no hope of out competing against you at their size.
- Joined
- 12 November 2007
- Posts
- 1,629
- Reactions
- 47
Usually because they see/understand things that most can't, or know the reality of the situation.
- Joined
- 9 June 2011
- Posts
- 1,926
- Reactions
- 480
I agree with every word Howard says. It's just depressing
- Joined
- 30 June 2007
- Posts
- 7,200
- Reactions
- 1,225
Hi Howard,
I did say that it falls apart on walk forward, which implies these are in-sample results. It is simply an optimized backtest with a high (90+%) win rate, and I'm well aware that in itself this has no immediate value whatsoever. It may lead somewhere, it may not. Over the years I've had hundreds of similar curves which I have ended up discarding. I'm well beyond the point of getting excited about a nice looking backtest. OOS curve is all over the shop and not worth posting.
- Joined
- 30 June 2007
- Posts
- 7,200
- Reactions
- 1,225
As traders, I believe what we should be aiming for is a mix of Howard's intelligence, minwa's guile, skc's detachment, TH's nimbleness and Canoz's market knowledge. That's your ultimate trader right there, if you could package it.
Hyper-intelligence without an ability to switch it off will lead to negative mind states and poor trading performance.
Also, we have no idea of anyone else's performance. Someone like Capblack or Skyquake could be quietly thrashing us with huge returns and no one would know.
Wysiwyg
Everyone wants money
- Joined
- 8 August 2006
- Posts
- 8,428
- Reactions
- 284
If the message is a huge Python is gonna eat us all then I'm outa here man.
If the message is a huge Python is gonna eat us all then I'm outa here man.
Barclay's index of all funds/CTA they track, no indication that systematic has gained any edge over discretionary in recent years. Discretionary have half the draw down because they are not stuck to a rigid set of rules that takes every setup treating them the same regardless of other factors.
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Posts
- 590
- Reactions
- 94
What is the message?
That we will never win at trading because you need to have advanced computer knowledge or a lot of resources like the big boys?
If there is no chance of winning
Might as well close down aussie stocks then.....
Invest in an etf and give up.
If you think your beat - you will be right.
If you think you'll win you could possibly be wrong - so what.
What a load of defeatist crap this thread is. Be careful what you read - it eventually effects what you think.
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Posts
- 590
- Reactions
- 94
Can you please clarify what you are referring to.
I was being sarcastic to make a point..
Sorry Omega - I was not referring to you rather the general content of this thread before I gave up reading and just quoted your post as the last post. I share the point you make.
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,400
- Reactions
- 6,317
Id be disappointed if that's how you or anyone else reads these posts.
They way I see it and understand it is this.
Everything changes and the financial markets are changing at a pace that is unprecedented.
The power of computers has change so dramatically that the Apollo 11 landing had the computing power of a current mobile phone infact one 3 yrs older than those today.
100,000s of people are more savvy today than yesterday. Computers are even learning from Computers. Yet there is in this thread an inherent negativity to the inevitable. Its here its available to you and I 1000s will make them selves available to it. More will learn and improve.
Why wouldn't anyone serious about making a few $$s in the financial markets not want to avail themselves to any tool that will not only help them shed light on a path they choose wether Fundamental OR Technical but answer the myriad of questions we all want answers to but are either afraid to ask, In capable of finding an answer remotely accurate or blissfully ignorant to the questions you should be asking and finding the answers to.
Its another very powerful tool
More than P&Ls or Balance sheets
VSA
Elliott
Candlesticks
and the list goes on and on.
Its there just like the computer was.
You had to learn how to use it. If you wanted to be better in certain areas you learnt Word and Excel and the 1000s of packages of software available. Or you could close your eyes lock yourself in a room with your adding machine and fountain pen and live miserably ever after.
You don't have to accept the challenge of exploring knowledge and implementation, but ignoring it will be at your peril. You'll be a complete fossil in 5 yrs.
Monty Pythons
"Its only a flesh wound " comes to mind.
Our Friend the knight faired well-------that's what!
In RED never a truer word spoken ---- not only reading but learning!
Its not a defeatist thread its a thread of awakening!
Everything worth while takes effort. To some the effort will be minor
to others it will be mammoth and like me they may need to employ those who are
far more capable in areas to help.
For those us (99.99%) who can't trade in the microseconds/arbitrage scope, we can only trade price on a time frame where it hasn't changed. More efficient only, maybe. Price is driven by human nature, not machines. Human nature has not evolved.
So do you think more people are more profitable today than 20 years ago as computers are more widely available ? You would be wrong.
That's odd, why would Howard add the lesser powerful RSI into it then ?
Heard that 5 years ago. 10 years ago too probably. Still not a fossil. Still see plenty (majority) of people profitable using "outdated" methods without advanced machine implementation.
Most would require some evidence of "outdated" methods failing/declining of performance or machines based systems with dominating performance to be awakened. I haven't seen (I basically spend 6-12 hours+ everyday in market related stuff) any recurring evidence of that. Maybe they are all silent with smashing performances - in that case I will miss out as I can't invest the time to delve into such a deep subject without any signs that it's the "future". Sorry but one Captain Cook who says he doesn't personally trade and that traditional methods are "outdated" and over when I see too much anecdotal evidence that those methods are performing the same as decades ago just won't cut it for me.
You have found it to be stronger than your TA personally though so kudos on you and maybe others will do the same too. That is encouraging to me..to see a wide diversity of methods working which dispels any fears of over saturation and dying out of a particular, especially outdated method.
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Posts
- 590
- Reactions
- 94
Yes understanding quantitative analysis is a useful tool to have at your disposal.
Yes computers are becoming more and more advanced.
Yes it can help with the $$
It is a mammoth task to learn...
Steady steady, hedge my bets
I just disagree with the current established view that something has to be quantified by numbers.
That only by quantifying it with advanced qunatitiave analysis is it then acceptable.
That being a quant is the only way and that without numbers you will be a mammoth
The people who caused the GFC quantified insurance and housing loans....
Then the models failed and they asked the people for a bailout...
I am pretty sure a rational person would have seen the loans were unreasonable if they just went and interviewed a couple of borrowers.
Human nature caused the crash and PHD's in suits legitimised it with numbers.
But herd all followed the quants numbers and crashed the world economy...
People trusted the numbers and quant analysis
I am just being the devils advocate to prove a point again!
Wysiwyg
Everyone wants money
- Joined
- 8 August 2006
- Posts
- 8,428
- Reactions
- 284
Still waiting for actual evidence where price action is different. Proof. The truth is price action has not changed and the only thing "unprecedented" is the hype.
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,400
- Reactions
- 6,317
Howard suggests the sweet spot is 3 days from his research. Clearly this may differ but longer timeframes are becoming harder to trade and "Predict ' Going forward than they were in years past.
Long periods of trending EG 2001-2008 are now not happening. Its not saying that micro robotic machine learning trading is going to be the only player in years to come. mind you if you have one---
I don't know do you? But also see below.
Not odd at all. Everything I mentioned above and everything I use and Howards RSI give us indicators or setups which generate signals to buy/sell/hold/place stops/position size/blah. By adding the now available skills and computing power to our trading we can answer many questions we couldn't answer before.
Including but not limited to.
(1) Does it/they work.
(2) If I add or sub tract this or that how does that impact my trading?
(3) Is there an optimum---sweet spot.
(4) Are my ideas profitable.
I'm sure Howard could add way more to this list.
See below
Accessibility to really advanced computer software and data analysis education to the general public is only now becoming available. The packages and education which went before us in the blooming computer age was at best rudimentary and at worst money making quackery. It really is only in recent years that quality people have become involved in making the sort of knowledge available to you and I. And the computer software and power is now at a point where if used properly can be very helpful.
In my opinion making it clearer what doesn't work more so than what does.
I don't see them (Out-dated as you put it) methods vanishing. To the contrary I see them being enabled and empowered. This Duck Trades---but he doesn't have to trade. He doesn't have to do a great deal actually. I love the challenge of business and Trading even if only when I feel like it is one.
This is another very enlightening challenge.
It doesn't replace T/A it adds immensely to it. Not just in possibilities through testing but in answering many of the accepted Truisms and questions that I didn't even know I should be asking.
Have you looked at a chart yourself or simply going on what Cap Cook is saying ? Chart of the S&P..most would not agree with you that long periods of trending are now not happening..quite the opposite actually the trends seem better than 01-08 do you not think ?
So statistics and optimization ? They've been around long before modern computing powers. And to point (1) Does it/they work. - if you need a computer to answer that you really shouldn't be trading.
Amibroker ? Been around since 1995. I'm sure other alternatives too. Yes now data churning are faster but so is pulling up charts for a discretionary trader/filtering criteria on balance sheets for a fundamentalist. Things have gotten more efficient - they have NOT EVOLVED to the point where having the latest computing power and packages gives you an edge for the retail trader.
Howard deems them outdated and over in his first post. I commend you that you love the challenge and the mental stimulation. Keeps your mind sharp from the mental workout. Personally bottom line I'm here to make a living and if there was a unchallenging way to do it I would.
- Joined
- 17 August 2006
- Posts
- 7,739
- Reactions
- 8,332
